On 18/11/2014 10:26, Max Reitz wrote:
> However, when you consider (as far as I looked into it) that a BDS is
> only closed when there are either no references to it (which will not
> happen as long as it has a BB) or when it is ejected, it suddenly does
> make sense: "Ejecting" really is something for the BB, so it makes sense
> to wait for that event (even though the name "close notifier" doesn't
> sound much like it...).
I agree, and indeed the notifier was added to deal with ejection.
Thanks for clarifying. I guess if QEMU were written in C++ we would
have a hierarchy like this:
BlockDevice (abstract)
BlockBackend
BlockDriverState
and there would be no duplication of function names; the BlockBackend
implementation would still have to forward to the top BlockDriverState.
Paolo
